“highly significant”

The increase in mortality was robust and highly significant (17/27 [63%] vs 5/131 [4%], OR 42.84, 95% CI 11.58-170.87; P < 0.001).

Differences between the varieties and also the parts of plants were highly significant (p ≤ 0.001).

The mean TMT showed a highly significant correlation with CSA in both groups (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.733; p<0.001), as well as in the melanoma subgroup (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.692; p<0.001) and lung cancer subgroup (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.767; p<0.001) separately.

Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity was highly significant (p < .001) and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy (KM0=0.810) value supported the factorability of the matrix ( 21 ).

As shown in Figure 3 A, reduction in the cell migration of GPE-treated DU145 cells was highly significant ( p < 0.001) in a dose-dependent manner, compared to control vehicle-treated cells.

caliginosa body mass from CdP5 to CdP25 was highly significant and negatively ( r 2 = 0.83 ± 1.51, p < 0.001) correlated with the phenanthrene concentration in soil.

At the 20 mm inter-tactor distance, we found a highly significant main effect of motor type on accuracy ( F (2, 32) = 27.99, p < 0.001, η G 2 = 0.24), but no interaction between the main effects of motor type and presentation direction ( F (2, 32) = 0.24, p = 0.788, for more, see results in “Tactile anisotropy”).

The likelihood ratio test comparing the two models was highly significant ( P < 0.001).

Highly significant differences ( P < 0.001) among lines, environments and line × environment interaction were observed for FDR of common rust in the DTMA panel of inbred lines (Table 3 ).

Highly significant ɸ st values ( ɸ st = 0.35, P < 0.001) indicated a clear phylogeographic structure between royal penguins against all populations of macaroni penguins.

• p <0.01, the difference between the two means is highly significant (HS). • p <0.001, the difference between the two means is very highly significant (VHS). • p> 0.05, the difference between the two means is not significant (NS).

The potent anti-inflammatory drug dexamethasone (50 ng/mL), inhibited the LPS-induced nitric oxide production (5.2 μg/mL with LPS + dexamethasone compared to 25.2 μg/mL in the presence of LPS alone).The tested samples exhibited different extents of anti-inflammatory activity, ranging from strong to weak activity in the order 23 > 24 > 22 > 18 > 12 > 4 and their effect even greater than that of dexamethasone, with highly significant inhibition values ( p < 0.001) of 95.7, 95.4, 91.0, 90.9, 90.7, 90.4, and 90.1%, respectively, compared to the LPS induced cells ( Figure 2 ).

A one-way ANOVA test applied on the concentrations values of the identified compounds listed in Table 1 showed that there is a highly significant difference between these three extracts ( p < 0.001). 2.2.

A one-way ANOVA test applied on the concentrations values of the identified compounds listed in Table 1 showed that there is a highly significant difference between these two extracts ( p < 0.001). 2.2.

The ANOVA of the quadratic regression model demonstrated that the model was highly significant, as was evident from a very low probability value ( p = 0.001).

A one-way ANOVA test applied on the concentrations values of the identified compounds listed in Table 1 showed that there is a highly significant difference between these two extracts ( p < 0.001). 2.2.

All pairwise comparisons of coefficients were highly significant ( P < 0.001).

It could be observed that the coefficient of X 2 X 3 , X 1 2 , X 2 2 and X 3 2 were highly significant ( p < 0.001).

The statistical results confirm the hypothesis that the differences between the results are either not significant ( p > 0.05), significant (0.001 < p < 0.05) or highly significant ( p < 0.001).

There was a significant statistical difference between the analyzed extracts in the DPPH and HAPX assays (0.001 < p < 0.05) and a highly significant difference in TEAC method ( p < 0.001). 2.4.

The statistical results confirm the hypothesis that the differences between the results are either not significant ( p > 0.05), significant (0.001 < p < 0.05), or highly significant ( p < 0.001). 4.

Overall repeated measure ANOVA revealed a highly significant main effect ( P < 0.001) and post hoc comparisons against the basline value were significant for the first 100 min.

Improvement remained highly significant ( P < 0.001) for dryness, dyspareunia, and burning) at the 6-month follow up.

Results: There was a progressive degeneration reflected in a highly significant reduction of disc volumen ( P < .001) with both sides isolated; also, but less remarkable, between discs isolated from one sided isolation and those from both sides and barely meaningful between controls and those isolated from one side.

For the 14 SSD subjects who reported having tinnitus, Pearson correlation analyses also showed a highly significant correlation between VAS and THI scores ( r = .879, p < .001).